This is not a private matter between a bishop and a priest. A pastor has a special office and is in fact a shepherd (pastor) to his own flock, which is also directly affected. This is why Canon Law provides for a special procedure for the removal of pastors (can.1740-1752).
Thus, if Fr. Paul, is in fact guilty of the charges leveled against him by the Archbishop, then all should know. Fr. Paul does not believe he is guilty and has chosen to fight the charges and has thus issued his permission for this letter to be released. According to Fr. Paul, his canon lawyer, Fr. Adolpho Dacanay, S. J., has completed the appeal of his removal and will present the appeal before the Congregation for the Clergy in Rome. Most lawyers do not take cases they think they will lose.
A pdf copy of this letter can be downloaded here.
OBSERVATIONS:
The decree accuses Father Paul of an "act of disobedience refusing to terminate the de facto employment of a registered sex offender working in the parish." It is noteworthy that the decree includes the term de facto since no previous notice from the archdiocese refers to the subject person's employment as de facto.
De facto means "in practice or actually, but not officially established". In 2011, Fr. Paul was ordered to terminate an officially established (on the payroll) employee NOT a de facto employee. Father Paul immediately complied with the order and terminated the employee on October 26, 2011. See the termination letter here.
If the archdiocese actually ordered Father Paul to terminate a de facto employee then let them produce the document which shows that. If they do not, then the fact is the subject person was NOT a de facto employee, but an actual employee, and the person was terminated as ordered.
The addition of the term de facto in the present Decree of Removal is evidence that the archdiocese is attempting to make a case where there is none. In fact, the attempt to trump up the charge by adding the term de facto is an act of serious dishonesty. The question is why? Most people know why.
I have never met Fr. Gofigan but all that I've ever heard over the years about him has been excellent. All that I've heard today on the newscasts, on the radio, on Tim's blog and on-line has been very disturbing. I hope Tim is correct when he writes that canon lawyers don't usually take cases they don't think they can win. I will continue to pray for Fr. Gofigan's reinstatement as pastor every day until a decision is handed down. This is the miracle I pray to Blessed Diego to grant whenever we pray for his intercession in mass.
ReplyDeleteRE: Anonymous' comment: "I will continue to pray for Fr. Gofigan's reinstatement as pastor every day until a decision is handed down. This is the miracle I pray to Blessed Diego to grant whenever we pray for his intercession in mass."
ReplyDeleteI'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who prays for Fr. Paul Gofigan's intention (to prevail in his case and be reinstated as the pastor at Sta. Barbara Church) during the prayer to Blessed Diego. It made sense to me that, given the fact that Blessed Diego is credited for bringing the Catholic Faith to our island, he would be the one to intercede for a local son to be restored to his full ministry.
While we hope and pray for the best for Fr. Paul, obviously at this point it has gone just beyond his reinstatement. A plot was hatched to get rid of him for another purpose, and lies have been compounding every since. We have a serious crisis of authority.
ReplyDeleteTrue, Tim. In addition to my prayer that Fr. Paul prevail, I also pray for the Church in Guam to be blessed with a new leader — a faithful, orthodox, competent shepherd who will be able to heal and unify our Church. I realize it will be a slow process, considering how long this division has festered, and it will require much prayer and fasting.
ReplyDelete